Mendocino County board approves new Ford Street house after heated debate over exterior second‑story deck

The Mendocino County Historical Review Board approved construction of a new single‑family residence on Ford Street and granted a variance for a reduced front‑yard setback on June 1, 2026, after a contentious discussion about exterior massing and design.

Staff told the board the application packet was corrected for the record: the variance request is for a 9‑foot, 6‑inch front‑yard setback (previously misstated as 9‑ft‑8‑in), and the proposed lot coverage is 2,184 square feet (22.5% of the lot), under the 25% threshold for two structures. Staff also noted that revised drawings were submitted May 6, 2026, and that an earlier 3‑D rendering submitted by the project agent was incorrect and superseded by the materials presented at a site visit.

Architect Deborah Lennox, representing the landowners, described design changes made after earlier board feedback: wider front stairs, removal/reduction of double railings, a low bench on the lower deck instead of a high railing, and a modest garden shed placed to visually screen an exterior staircase. Lennox said the project aims to remain low in profile and use Victorian vernacular elements while remaining a good neighbor.

An architect who spoke during public comment (Kelly) argued the design retains a horizontal emphasis and a prominent exterior second‑story deck that she said is inconsistent with the town’s 19th‑century vertical proportions. Other public speakers and several board members said the applicants had responded meaningfully to prior feedback, noted examples of railings and decks elsewhere in town, and argued the board’s role is to ensure harmony rather than exact replication.

Board deliberations focused on whether the proposed exterior second‑story deck is an unacceptable modern feature that “fundamentally alters the massing” of a single‑story house or whether the design changes and contextual elements (the shed and reduced railings) make the structure compatible with surrounding houses. Staff clarified which elements had changed between public packages and confirmed the deck and facade adjustments are the primary differences.

A motion to approve the permit and the variance passed by a 4–1 roll‑call vote; Julian Lopez was recorded as the lone no. Staff said a notice of action will be sent to the landowner within 24 hours and that the permit is subject to a 10‑day appeal period.

The record shows the board handled late submissions of renderings and that the approval depends on the project being built in accordance with the revised plans now on file.